AR4 ZODs

From: David Holland

31 July 2013

Dear Meteorological Office,

Please supply me with electronic copies of all the 'Zero Order Drafts' also referred to as the ZODs, of the 2007 Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change, or IPCC AR4 for short, held by the Met Office.

From: Enquiries
Meteorological Office

31 July 2013

Thank you for your email. We aim to respond to our emails within 24 hours, so one of our Weather Desk Advisors will be in touch shortly.

In the meantime, if you have any questions or your enquiry is urgent, please phone the Weather Desk on 0870 900 0100, this number is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Alternatively you can tweet us @metoffice

Choose how to stay updated with the latest weather and climate information. Join our 125,000 followers on twitter to get interactive forecasts or see our latest activities using your choice of social media.

Your personal details will be stored in our database. The information will not be passed to any third parties. Please advise us if you do not wish your details to be stored. The Met Office is a Trading Fund of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and is registered under the Data Protection Act 1998.

Confidentiality Notice This e-mail is intended for the addressee only. Its contents are provided "in confidence" and may be covered by contractual, legal or other privilege. If you are not the addressee, you may not use or copy it to any other person. If you receive this e-mail in error, then please contact the sender as detailed above.

Confidentiality Notice This e-mail is intended for the addressee only. Its contents are provided "in confidence" and may be covered by contractual, legal or other privilege. If you are not the addressee, you may not use or copy it to any other person. If you receive this e-mail in error, then please contact the sender as detailed above.

From: David Holland

28 August 2013

Dear FOImanager,

You state, “However, when an exception applies to the information and the public interest test has to be conducted, the EIR allow the time for response to be longer than 20 working days.” Where in the EIR does it say that? I object most strongly to your unjustified delay.

If you are thinking of regulation 7, it relates to the “complexity and volume of the information requested” not the complexity of your arguments for refusal. In any case those arguments were exhaustively examined by the Tribunal in EA/2012/0193. The unanimous views of the tribunal in respect of the this request could not have been clearer than stated in paragraphs 79-81. I have appended them below. If you have decided to ignore this Tribunal, as you are entitled to, you will have plenty of time to develop your new arguments for the Commisioner.

EA/2012/0193 Paragraphs 79 - 81 “79. The position would likely be different if disclosure was sought after the publication of the final report. We note that the Commissioner likewise took into account the timing of the request and the specific impact disclosure would have while the IPCC fifth assessment process was on-going (paragraph 27 of the Decision Notice). The evidence is that after the final report is published, all drafts, except for the ZODs are made available to the public. We note that IPCC’s own policy documents do not distinguish between ZODs and other drafts and there appears to be no clear policy nor a clear rationale for why the ZODs are not published at that time. Certainly, once the final report is published, any concerns about misuse of the ZODs or the information being taken out of context, falls away, as does, in our view, the concern about scientists new to the assessment report process having a safe space in which to develop their views without being held to account for views that are still in progress. At the point at which the assessment report is published, the FODs and SODs become available to the pubic and they are able to assess the robustness of the final report. Publication of the ZODS at the same time would have the effect, therefore, of promoting the public interest considerations in favour of disclosure as identified above, without compromising, to any significant extent, the concerns about disclosure relied on by the respondent.

“80. What it would not do is to allow the public to put forward their views while the report is in draft stage and therefore, to influence the final report. However, we bear in mind that they can do so in relation to the FODs. Any person can declare themselves an expert and comment on the FODs. To the extent that there is a public interest in such contributions being made, we consider that that can reasonably be met through that process.

!81. Although on the evidence before us, we consider that the public interest balance would favour disclosure after the final report is published, that can be no more than an indication. It is not within in our jurisdiction to order disclosure at any future date. We can only consider the circumstances as at the date of the request. Disclosure at a later date, would have to be subject to a request at that time and would have to be considered in light of the evidence and circumstances at that time. Given that we are not yet at that stage, our decision can only be in relation to disclosure as at the date of the request, ie, before the publication of the final report. In that regard, and on a balance of probabilities, and for the reasons given, we find that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure.”

Confidentiality NoticeThis e-mail is intended for the addressee only. Its contents are provided "in confidence" and may be covered by contractual, legal or other privilege. If you are not the addressee, you may not use or copy it to any other person. If you receive this e-mail in error, then please contact the sender as detailed above.

At the time of AR4, 2002 to 2007, the IPCC decision that you are now relying upon had never been suggested or agreed. The only IPCC settled view at that time was that the working groups were required to operate in an open and transparent basis and the participants could have had no proper expectation of confidentiality. In April 2002 your former Chief Executive, Sir John Houghton stated on the public record of the Royal Society of Chemistry that the IPCC process was required to be completely open and transparent. The Climategate emails show that in 2008 efforts at the IPCC failed to get AR4 WGI correspondence considered confidential. Even now the 2011 decision that you rely upon states that the drafts are confidential only until the acceptance of the report, which in this case was May 2007.

As stated in my request, the Tribunal ruling EA/2012/0193, in paragraphs 79 – 81, gave the clearest guidance that it would have ordered the release of the ZODs in that case if it were considering the appeal in circumstances as exist in this case. I believe therefore that refusal will fail at appeal and urge that you spare the public purse the cost of a complaint to the Information Commissioner and any possible appeal. Such complaint if needed will include a complaint that the extra 20 days you took was improper as your grounds for refusal are an almost exact meme of the pleadings in EA/2012/0193.

From: Enquiries
Meteorological Office

25 September 2013

Thank you for your email. We aim to respond to our emails within 24 hours, so one of our Weather Desk Advisors will be in touch shortly.

In the meantime, if you have any questions or your enquiry is urgent, please phone the Weather Desk on 0870 900 0100, this number is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Alternatively you can tweet us @metoffice

Choose how to stay updated with the latest weather and climate information. Join our 145,000 followers on twitter to get interactive forecasts or see our latest activities using your choice of social media.

Your personal details will be stored in our database. The information will not be passed to any third parties. Please advise us if you do not wish your details to be stored. The Met Office is a Trading Fund of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and is registered under the Data Protection Act 1998.

Confidentiality Notice This e-mail is intended for the addressee only. Its contents are provided "in confidence" and may be covered by contractual, legal or other privilege. If you are not the addressee, you may not use or copy it to any other person. If you receive this e-mail in error, then please contact the sender as detailed above.

Confidentiality Notice This e-mail is intended for the addressee only. Its contents are provided "in confidence" and may be covered by contractual, legal or other privilege. If you are not the addressee, you may not use or copy it to any other person. If you receive this e-mail in error, then please contact the sender as detailed above.